UCLA student tasered by campus police for not showing ID

[pbzmag]

That's battery. You specifically mentioned shooting a peace officer. That's attempted murder. Attempted murder is not a felony wobbler.

Your right. Attempted murder carries life imprisonment with the possibility of parole and attempted premeditated murder of a safety officer is punishable by a minimum term of fifteen years of a 15-to-life sentence. Murder of a peace officer is second-degree murder which carries life without parole(PC 190(b)). There is also 1st degree murder with special circumstances which carries death or confinement in the state prison for life without possibility of parole(PC 190.2). Been drinking the night before till 2am. Everyone knows what happens the next morning.

[PyRo]

It is not a question of identifying yourself because you are being arrested or charged, it is a requirement to identify yourself at all times. In reality though a LEO is not going to walk uop and just ask you for identification for no reason what so ever. If there is a need to verify your ID or just get your information for witness/investigation purposes, they will ask. Someone who did not appear of interest or importance at one moment may be crucial later on...would you want the nice LEO to not obtain the information of an accident witness who may save your butt in insurance liability or catch a criminal later who slipped by? It is no privacy concern or violation.

It seems we are talking about two differant things here. I'm not against requireing people to identify themselves. It seems that detaining someone because they don't have proof of identity on their person may be going too far.

[bornl33t]

*** Click... off topic ****

here is some good reading here:

http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm

Our forefathers had not much trust in Governements did they? Probably with good reason. Seems they felt that if every man was armed, then it would be difficult or at least less likely for any Regular Militia or standing Army to overthrow the Government. Or to use the standing army to remain in power without the will of the people. They also felt defense (of both the country and ones self and loved ones) was a personal responsibility. It very well is. Then, today... and tomorrow it may become even more important.

*** Click back on topic ****

Thanks, that's a good read!

[Recon by Fire]

It seems we are talking about two differant things here. I'm not against requireing people to identify themselves. It seems that detaining someone because they don't have proof of identity on their person may be going too far.

Then what is a cop supposed to do when Mr. Anti-Govt Student claims his name is John Doe and has no ID. Guess he should just say "okay" and let him go on his way...he didn't want to play the game.

[Glickman]

It seems we are talking about two differant things here. I'm not against requireing people to identify themselves. It seems that detaining someone because they don't have proof of identity on their person may be going too far.

thats colleges for you though. they have gotten extremely serious when it comes to ID and students.

[FactsOfLife]

What kind of camera phone is he using? Its got pretty sweet resolution.

I would have tazed him, he pitched a fit, and was non compliant.
And he cried...

He cried? Tazer him again!

[bornl33t]

I'm not positive, but I would place a bet on the nokia N series. Nokia is the undisputed king of cell phones.

[DiRTyBuNNy]

It seems we are talking about two differant things here. I'm not against requireing people to identify themselves. It seems that detaining someone because they don't have proof of identity on their person may be going too far.

next time you're going through an airport how about you tell them you don't have an ID and see if they let you on the plane because you swear you are who you say you are..

--Mr. DB

[Lohman446]

It seems we are talking about two differant things here. I'm not against requireing people to identify themselves. It seems that detaining someone because they don't have proof of identity on their person may be going too far.

So your required to show ID, but if you don't thats ok too?

[Altimas]

next time you're going through an airport how about you tell them you don't have an ID and see if they let you on the plane because you swear you are who you say you are..

--Mr. DB

Sure they wont let you on the plane, but they arn't gonna tazer you just because you dont have ID and are in an airport.

[PyRo]

Then what is a cop supposed to do when Mr. Anti-Govt Student claims his name is John Doe and has no ID. Guess he should just say "okay" and let him go on his way...he didn't want to play the game.

The situation in question here occured on private property and they did exactly what they should have.

[PyRo]

thats colleges for you though. they have gotten extremely serious when it comes to ID and students.

A college is a private organization and has a right to require ID. I'm talking about state or local law though.

[Pneumagger]

Why the heck is everyone saying he got tazed for not showing ID? Whoever titled this thread needs tazed. He got tazed for failing to comply with lawful orders that were to prove his right to be there... period. He continually posed himself as more and more of a threat to the peace, the officers saftey, and the saftey of the students through both his direct actions and words.

That is exactly the situation a tazer was designed for - to control escalating situations and mitigate potential danger to persons before physical or lethal action is required. PERIOD.

The only question in my mind was did he deserve it 3 times. But honestly, IMO, that was the most polite tazering ever. The first use was merited by the situation and subsequent uses were clearly communicated to the vagrant. Basically (in not so many words):
"Let us escort you out, or you will be tazed"
"No, F*** OFF"
~~ZAP~~~
"Now let's try this again... get up and leave"
"Patriot act blah... rabble rabble... F*** OFF ...."
~~ZAP~~~
etc, etc, etc

Seriously, he baited and fronted the law... and he got every bit he deserved. The sad part is, even when the cops are aquitted in court of law, the guy's gonna win in civil court and sue the crap out everything in that room. Dang freaking liberals

[PyRo]

next time you're going through an airport how about you tell them you don't have an ID and see if they let you on the plane because you swear you are who you say you are..

--Mr. DB

That has absolutly nothing to do with what I'm saying. I never said they should take your word for it. Getting on a plane, into a government building, etc is one thing. Walking down the street is another. If you go to the airport, try to get your ticket and find you don't have your wallet should you be detained until they can confirm your identity? Or should they just refuse to let you on the plane and send you on your way?

[PyRo]

So your required to show ID, but if you don't thats ok too?

I'm talking about state law. Say you didn't have any ID on you and you were walking down the street and for whatever reason you were asked by an officer for ID. I bet you'de be pretty annoyed if the officer proceded to put you in the back of the car and detain you until you could prove who you were.


What I'm talking about here is a law that requires every person in the United States or a given juristiction to carry an ID on their person at all times.